# FDA Tobacco Legislation



## ghe-cl (Apr 9, 2005)

(I hope this doesn't show up twice. If so, I apologize. I tried once before, but it doesn't seem to have worked.)

I thought it would be useful to let everyone know the facts about the FDA legislation. The following is directly from the IPCPR on the FDA legislation. As you can see, the nicotine regulations apply only to cigarettes and the legislation itself does not include cigars or pipe tobacco: 

FDA Legislation: With the House having passed legislation giving the FDA authority over tobacco products, the measure is currently being debated on the Senate floor and is expected to pass early next week. It is not expected to be altered significantly by the Senate. The products which will be regulated first by the FDA are cigarettes, roll-your-own cigarette tobacco, and smokeless tobacco. The FDA will publish a final rule regarding those products approximately 180 days (six months) after the legislation is enacted into law. That rule, which will become effective no later than one year after the FDA legislation is enacted, will be almost identical to the rules promulgated by the agency in 1996. 

Should the agency decide to regulate any other tobacco product, it is required to publish a proposed rulemaking in the Federal Register, include supporting justification and findings and provide a comment period of not less than 60 days. No such regulation may take effect before one year after its publication "unless necessary for the protection of the public health."

Beginning three months after enactment of the legislation, flavorings (other than tobacco or menthol) will be banned in cigarettes only. The cost of regulating tobacco products will be provided through user fees assessed on tobacco manufacturers and importers. However, user fees will not be imposed on an industry unless and until it is formally regulated by the FDA. Thus, user fees will be paid initially only by cigarette, ryo cigarette tobacco, and smokeless tobacco companies.


----------



## Blaylock-cl (Apr 28, 2006)

George...I moved the original into the Tobacco Legislation Forum.

I'll should have left a redirect, so you knew where it was. I'll do that for this one


----------



## dmkerr (Oct 27, 2008)

I'm curious as to whether clove cigarettes will be disallowed into the U.S. They used to be huge sellers and I would guess they still have quite a presence in the U.S.


----------



## plexiprs (Nov 18, 2005)

ghe said:


> I thought it would be useful to let everyone know the facts about the FDA legislation. The following is directly from the IPCPR on the FDA legislation. As you can see, the nicotine regulations apply only to cigarettes and the legislation itself does not include cigars or pipe tobacco:


I disagree with both you and the IPCPR on the exclusions alleged for pipe tobaccos and cigars. Everyone can, and should, read the latest version of HR 1256 dated June 11 (#5 of 5 versions) at THOMAS in single page format by using this LINKEE.

Now, the word "pipe" appears TWICE in the text, as follows:



> LIMITATION ON POWER GRANTED TO THE FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION- Because of the importance of a decision of the Secretary to issue a regulation--
> 
> `(A) banning all cigarettes, all smokeless tobacco products, all little cigars, all cigars other than little cigars, all pipe tobacco, or all roll-your-own tobacco products; or
> 
> ...


This is no exemption as stated, but prohibits certain actions by the FDA on ALL tobacco products and specifically _*includes*_ cigars and pipe tobacco.

The second appearance of "pipe" is in Sec 919 under User Fees and states:



> IN GENERAL- For purposes of subparagraph (A), the applicable percentage for a fiscal year for each of the following classes of tobacco products shall be determined in accordance with clause (ii):
> `(I) Cigarettes.
> `(II) Cigars, including small cigars and cigars other than small cigars.
> `(III) Snuff.
> ...


No exemption here .......

Cigars? Well, the plural appears 10 times. In the sections quoted above and also again Section 919;



> 5) ALLOCATION FOR CIGARS- Notwithstanding paragraph (4), if a user fee assessment is imposed on cigars, the percentage share of each manufacturer or importer of cigars shall be based on the excise taxes paid by such manufacturer or importer during the prior fiscal year.


Now, Sec 101 adds tobacco products to the Federal Food Drug and Cosmetic Act. It says;



> (rr)(1) The term `tobacco product' means any product made or derived from tobacco that is intended for human consumption, including any component, part, or accessory of a tobacco product (except for raw materials other than tobacco used in manufacturing a component, part, or accessory of a tobacco product).
> 
> `(2) The term `tobacco product' does not mean an article that is a drug under subsection (g)(1), a device under subsection (h), or a combination product described in section 503(g).


Section 901 establishes the "FDA AUTHORITY OVER TOBACCO PRODUCTS," that is;



> `(a) In General- Tobacco products, including modified risk tobacco products for which an order has been issued in accordance with section 911, shall be regulated by the Secretary under this chapter and shall not be subject to the provisions of chapter V.
> 
> `(b) Applicability- This chapter shall apply to all cigarettes, cigarette tobacco, roll-your-own tobacco, and smokeless tobacco and to any other tobacco products that the Secretary by regulation deems to be subject to this chapter.


Now, I still see no exemptions ....... Title II is for CIGARETTES only, but that is labeling and package information requirements.

Remember, this LAW grants rule-making authority and regulation to the FDA. THe law does not establish all the requirements, those come in the RULES that the FDA establishes. Yes, this law prohibits the outright banning of certain items, but I can't find any explicit statement as quoted by the IPCPR who have this on their site;



> Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act - Amends the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to provide for the regulation of tobacco products by the Secretary of Health and Human Services through the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), including through disclosure, annual registration, inspection, recordkeeping, and user fee requirements. Legislation excludes cigars and pipe tobacco from FDA regulation.


I don't see where they are finding that, unless they reference a previous versions from the House ..... Can anyone else find this exemption?? :hmm:


----------



## plexiprs (Nov 18, 2005)

PS: Decent writings and news on the legislation. Senate Passes Smoking Regulations Bill | Pipe Smokers Intelligencer


----------



## Alpedhuez55 (Dec 16, 2005)

It looks like there are differences between the House and Senate Bill. The house may want to be more far-reaching and include pipes. Even if the final version of the bill does not mention pipe tobacco, once you give the FDA regulation of one type of tobacco, they are going to eventually try to expand that to others. You know there will be roll your own cig companies that will try to claim it is pipe tobacco if it can help them avoid regulation.

What I would be most worried about if the FDA starts regulating things would be to see stores that do their own blends. If shops like Boswell, Perretti's, Pipes & Cigars or the Owl Shp, who all make house blends that I like, are suddenly going to fall under FDA regulation, will they just give up on it, or farm the blending to larger companies like Altidas. Or if tobacco exporters need to meet the same regulations will they just stop shipping to the US. 

Next thing you know 2001 Christmas Cheer will not b released until 2014 while it is awaiting FDA Approval :anim_soapbox:

Welcome to the Nanny State.


----------



## plexiprs (Nov 18, 2005)

The Tonka bean (Tonquin) as a vanilla-like flavoring is already banned in the US, by the FDA, as a food additive. Will this immediately transfer to their role regarding tobacco??


----------



## mojo (Apr 25, 2009)

The blenders might come out with a special blend called "USA Girlie Politico" blend.


----------



## ghe-cl (Apr 9, 2005)

I'm not a lawyer, nor am I a lobbyist. But those I've spoken to, familiar with federal regulation and with this legislation, say that the bill does not permit the FDA to regulate cigars or pipe tobacco, among others. If the FDA or HHS secretary were to want to expand regulation under the current legislation it would require considerable additional actions which, I believe, would also include hearings. The fact that the IPCPR, the primary lobbying group for pipe and cigar manufacturers, has not been overly alarmed about this bill says, to me at least, quite a lot.


----------



## Acesfull (Dec 9, 2007)

I like Ron Paul's perspective

YouTube - Ron Paul on Government Regulation Of Tobacco


----------



## Mr.Lordi (May 20, 2007)

Acesfull said:


> I like Ron Paul's perspective
> 
> YouTube - Ron Paul on Government Regulation Of Tobacco


Ron Paul is great, he really is. Unfortunately, that speech was not well constructed at all.

I'm appreciative that he is standing up against the people passing this, but structuring his speech and touching on critical points in that short amount of time would of been nice. As a doctor, he could of dropped some medical statics as well.

I didn't expect him to be pulling out charts in three minutes, but structured arguments with facts, work best.

Still, the Republicans should run him in 2012, he is probably their best candidate by far.

I am thankful he took the time he took to speak out against this, though.


----------



## Acesfull (Dec 9, 2007)

I liked his points and agree that the government and anti-smoking zealots are working towards a prohibition that will fail miserably. And the fact people need to be educated and left for decision making for themselves and not be nannied


----------



## golfermd (Feb 18, 2009)

They tried this once with alcohol, and we had some interesting times until it was repealed.


----------



## Rubix^3 (Nov 10, 2008)

If...
My basement will soon be converted into a cigar speakeasy.



Of course one might ask why wait.
:biggrin:


----------



## cp478 (Oct 23, 2008)

the alchohol prohibition helped lead us into the depression .
times are bad enough without them trying something stupid like that again!


----------



## jledou (Jul 18, 2008)

The government try something stupid?? Nahh never ........


----------



## Mr.Lordi (May 20, 2007)

cp478 said:


> the alchohol prohibition helped lead us into the depression .
> times are bad enough without them trying something stupid like that again!


I would hate to defend the people supporting the bill, but I don't think we will get THAT far, as it didn't work last time and America can't risk looking unstable to the terrorist, that would be really bad;Fighting two wars while having to combat homeland upheaval. Although I don't think Americans will go as far as they did in the 1920's. Most Americans are too fat and lazy to bother doing anything about it. They sit, nice and docile, like sheepele in front of the idiot box all day long, listening to the talking heads.

There are stoner's with more motivation then your average American. Not talking about anyone here though. At least we are having somewhat open discourse about this, which is more to say then most. 

It should be noted, even though I am against prohibition, I am against breaking the law as well, and hope it doesn't come to a new era of Capone's.

You know a really good movie to watch? John Carptener's "They Live" that movie is a great 80's b flick, but at the same time, kinda a scary prediction of where we really are now.

I've personally given up TV, it really does squash ones ability for rational thinking. That is a different topic for a different thread, though.


----------



## KevinG (Apr 10, 2005)

plexiprs said:


> I disagree with both you and the IPCPR on the exclusions alleged for pipe tobaccos and cigars. Everyone can, and should, read the latest version of HR 1256 dated June 11 (#5 of 5 versions) at THOMAS in single page format by using this LINKEE.


Same here. I am not convinced that this doesn't include cigars and pipe tobacco. I asked the IPCPR directly, and they told me the same thing, that cigars and pipe tobacco are excluded, but I still don't see where they are getting that.

I would love for them to be right, but you sure can't prove it by what I read.


----------



## KevinG (Apr 10, 2005)

Mr.Lordi said:


> You know a really good movie to watch? John Carptener's "They Live" that movie is a great 80's b flick, but at the same time, kinda a scary prediction of where we really are now.


Love that movie. Remember the chick that co-starred? I don't know her name, but she had amazing blue eyes.


----------

